RSS

Search Cigarfan.net

Padilla Artemis

Padilla’s Artemis series is the first box pressed cigar for Padilla, but just about everything else about it is quite familiar — it’s a Nicaraguan puro utilizing Aganorsa tobacco, and it’s made at the Raices Cubanas factory in Honduras. Those are enticing details, and enough to get my salivary glands going.

Artemis uses Cuban-seed criollo and corojo from Nicaragua’s now-famous Aganorsa company, a tobacco grower affiliated with Casa Fernandez cigars. The line was originally released in 2011 as a brick-and-mortar exclusive, but it now appears to be available online as well.

It looks like the lion from the Dominus line has clawed its way to the top of the advertising department and has been declared the company’s icon. It now appears on the bands for Padilla’s Miami and 1932 lines as well, bringing some needed consistency to the brand’s presentation. (I was always fond of the fountain pen nib on the bands of some of the older blends, but there is something to be said for a single and recognizable emblem.)

Padilla’s Artemis is available in four sizes:

Robusto: 5 x 54

Torpedo: 6 1/4 x 52

Toro: 6 x 54

Double torpedo: 6 3/4 x 56

Construction Notes

I’m glad I smoked the Artemis in two sizes, the robusto and the double torpedo, because one was simply superior to the other. Both are nice looking sticks, especially the double torpedo. In reality this is a zepellin perfecto, and a big one, with a finely finished head and foot. (The head and the foot are distinguishable only by the placement of the band.)

The wrapper is a dark colorado maduro with a moderate amount of oil. Both sizes had an accessible draw, and the box press didn’t seem to have much of an effect on the performance of the cigar. But I experienced a burn problem with the double torpedo that I didn’t with the robusto, and it wasn’t the irregular burn that is the hallmark of many box-pressed cigars. This was a more serious problem that affected the taste of the cigar — the wrapper would not burn in sync with the binder and filler, resulting in a flavor that was at first merely tepid, but quickly made it hot, bitter, and unbalanced.

For this reason I’m going to focus on the robusto and not the double torp.

Overall construction: Very good for the robusto; Needs improvement for the double torpedo.

Tasting Notes

If you’re familiar with the Padilla 1932 or some of the cigars from Casa Fernandez you’ll recognize the flavor of Aganorsa tobacco. It’s a little different in the Artemis, but it’s there. The first notes are of leather with some sweetness and a little bite. The aroma is slightly fruity, but also reminiscent of hardwood smoke — something like hickory, perhaps. After a minute or two the pepper begins to build on the palate.

The mid-section is earthy but a little sharp. The flavor isn’t quite as clean as Illusione’s “original document” line, but it has that crisp minerally tang which is Aganorsa’s trademark.

The final inch and a half is rich and powerful in flavor, though the cigar is still medium-to-heavy in both body and strength. The last section bottoms out a little as the spice takes over and edges out the subtle notes on the nose.

Conclusion

Fans of Padilla and Aganorsa leaf will probably enjoy the Artemis, though perhaps not as much as some other blends that employ that particular leaf. The flavors are quite pronounced, and in the robusto were well balanced up to the last third of the cigar.

I was more than a little disappointed in the double torpedo, but I would probably pick up the robusto again at the right price. The right price for me is a little south of the MSRP, which is in the 9 to 10 USD range. To be honest, Padilla has already provided this cigar’s competition in the Padilla 1932, and in that contest the winner goes to the elder blend.

Final Score: 86

Due to a memory error in my camera I lost my cigar-in-progress photos. I know you only come here for the articles, but my apologies anyway.

Advertisements

Share this:

Like this:

Related

Post navigation

9 thoughts on “Padilla Artemis”

Interesting review. Your notes match my own pretty well. The Artemis seems to have a little different taste to me than the 1932 or Miami or Dominus. The latter 3 seem to lean heavily on the coffee and cocoa notes, while the Artemis is brighter tasting, if that makes any sense. I like your comparison to the Illusione original documents – I think especially the CG4, the #2, and the HL.

I also had burn issues. I had the torpedo (not the double torp) and the toro, and both suffered from terrible burn issues. I’ll have to try the robusto, but for the asking price I think the construction should be better. Then again, I’ve had burn issues with the other lines as well. I noticed that Padilla recently repackaged the Miami and 1932 lines. I wonder if he changed the production as well or just the bands. Anyway, thanks for the review!

I agree with both you and Robert. I have the toros, and so far the burn issues far outweigh any positives. In fact, I’m still not sure what this cigar is supposed to taste like, since it doesn’t want to stay lit and winds up hot and soft. I’ve decided not to touch them again for a long while. Sad, because I’ve loved all the other Padillas I’ve had.

Amazing, I’ll bet you that if Cigarfan had opined that the Artemis had burned perfectly, everyone would have agreed with that comment. Do you guys ever listen to yourself, have you ever rolled a cigar? If so, you would know that even an apprentice roller with bad tobacco would have a hard time (but not impossible} rolling a cigar with a bad burn. I’ve smoked this cigar and LOVE it. No problems whatsoever. Think about what would make a cigar burn unevenly, yes, that’s right, conditioning. Did you buy a full box and condition them properly? I hope you didn’t buy a five pack from CI and smoke them immediately, expecting a perfect burn. . Or even worse, maybe a sampler.

Glad you had a better experience than some of us did, but your experience and opinion does not invalidate anyone else’s. Any manufacturer can impute the fault of a product to the consumer, but you can bet that won’t change the consumer’s mind. Plenty of other cigars, including a delicious 1932 that I smoked last night, perform perfectly under exactly the same storage conditions and aging.

Not every cigar that rolls off the line is going to succeed, even from a quality producer like Padilla. (Who is changing producers once again, so the Artemis and most of his other brands are history anyway.)

It’s an absolutely gorgeous looking cigar. I only wish the gift would have lived up to the packaging. Here’s to hoping that I’ll have to eat my words in a few months. And yes, the 1932’s are a wonderful smoke, as are the Dominus.